is it possible to have a non-violent revolution or nation founding?
stalin and mao and hitler are rightly condemned for the tremendous casualties resultant in their revolutions, but should they be condemned for the violence, or for the terrific extent of the violence?
when north america was colonized by europeans, 95% (diamond, guns, germs, and steel)of the indigenous population was killed by disease, famine, and fratricide (the latter two usually being related to the confusion caused by disease). by the time wagons moved west, there wasn't much in there way (imagine how different american history might have been if there had been 20 times more injuns for the duke to fight off). everyone knows that israel's recent re-founding didn't go well, but archaelogical evidence suggests that the initial judaic conquest of canaan was quite bloody too. the walls of jericho really did come tumbling down.
essentially every area currently inhabited by humanity has been continuously inhabited for thousands of years now. if it is not possible to move in without pushing someone out, does that mean that stalin's crime in destroying his class enemies only differs from george washington's in exhausting the british by degree, not in nature?
The best kind of democratic system? The one that led to incredible inflation, widespread corruption, class division, and best of all, led to the rule of the most horrifically evil government in history. Yeah, that's a model system right thar.
You are right about >>17, though. Kristalnacht and similar acts of terror were not just committed by Nazi party members, by the way, but more by incredibly racist Germans.
Can we have an internet discussion without using tired internet meme's. What was the advantage of using "thar" over "there"? To me personally, it deteriorated everything you typed prior to it (Not that it was impressive to begin with, just a small list of unsubstantiated generalizations.)
Conversely, your complaint would have been a lot more effective had you managed to correctly form the plural of "meme".
Oh yeah? Well, the period at the end of a sentence goes inside quotation marks, "Citizen."
>>22 In the US, not in the UK. That rule was created by US printers.
"And just why, you may ask, do they belong there? Well, it seems to be the result of historical accident. When type was handset, a period or comma outside of quotation marks at the end of a sentence tended to get knocked out of position, so the printers tucked the little devils inside the quotation marks to keep them safe and out of trouble. But apparently only American printers were more attached to convenience than logic, since British printers continued to risk the misalignment of their periods and commas."
>>17 Kristallnacht(Night of the Broken Glass), the burning of the Reichstag and the Sturmabteilung was a bit gruesome..
Kristallnacht was deliberately pre-meditated. A young Jew killing a German official was the perfect incentive for it. Jewish Synagouges were desecrated and Jews on the streets were beaten and killed.
The burning of the Reichstag was a motive to enact the Enabling Act due to the actions of the "communists".
The Sturmabteilung(SA), or Storm Troopers were comprised of thugs and criminals. Essentially Hitler's bodyguard unit before the Shutzstaffel(SS)was established. Former SA leader Ernst Rohm was massacred, along with other high ranking SA officals on the Night of the Long Knives for supposedly trying to take over. Truth is, he was killed because the truth was spreading about his homosexuality, and Hitler did not want anyone to know. Hermann Goering assumed control afterwards.
Sorry for the histroy recap, I'm just highly fanatical about Nazi Germany. The history is so intriguing. I plan on becoming a Historian based on it.
What, are you trying to say that only obsessive-compulsive language perscriptivists can appreciate irony in someone complaining about language use, and misusing language at the same time?
I'm saying that 21 and 23 is "Nihon" from Wikipedia, a comical obsessive-compulsive language perscriptivist.
Fellow 4-chers! Recently I was discussing the last hundred years of what the American Empire has been doing to foreign countries, such as invasion, trade blockades, the propagation of "free market theory", and quoted many of my sources (Noami Klien, Noam Chomsky, official documents, etc.). A neocon told me I was an idiot and I should be sent to boot camp for re-education! A neolib told me I'm full of shit and should be shot! I asked them to back up their claims against the people/documents I was quoting from, and they simply ignored me.
So I put it to you! For instance, I made the claim that since under the 1996 War Crimes Act, a Commander In Chief is liable for the actions of his soldiers, and under the Geneva Convention, the raid of a hospital of any kind, by either side, is a violation of the Geneva Convention. Does that mean because they raided a Fallujah General Hospital, that Bush can be put to death? The Commander In Chief is defined as a person who falls under the 1996 War Crimes Act passed by the Republicans, and thus would that make Bush liable?
I was viciously spat at!
I think your main problem is trying to argue with an extremist. They will not read or agree with anything that disagrees with their own ideas and ideals. NO MORE BACON
Lots of people will not read or listen to anything that disagrees with their ideals. Instead they create little echo chambers of people who agree with them, and it becomes a contest of who has the biggest echo chamber...
I'll gladly listen to criticism, but I'm not going to waste my time on people like Ann Coulter or Micheal Moore.
Fair enough. I think people should listen when other people seriously try to express a different point of view, but ignoring entertainers who are, if anything trying to cheerlead those who already agree, is another matter entirely. So yeah, I'm with you on that one.
I'm usually considered a lefty when it comes to political debates but unlike some of my peers I don't go to or make one one of those echo chambers as described by >>7 it will only stop you from looking at the big pixles and I do listen to what Coulter and Moore has to say because they represent the two extremes of opposing ideologies.
Why did you have to bump half the threads on the board to add nothing whatsoever to any of them? If you absolutely must post shit, learn to use sage.
It is called living in denial. You do not want to hear, see or consider any evidence which might bring you to the conclusion that you have made MAJOR mistakes and are just plain wrong or have been an idiot for a long time of your life. Consider those who believe in Jesus, Bible, Mohammed, Koran, Aliens, UFOs, Wizards and Harry Potter, etc. Fantasy books. Yet, people are willing to kill to protect their faith.
I, however, do want to see such evidence. Better to fix my mistakes sooner, rather than later (or never at all). That said, I am a young person so I don't have much at stake regarding my current beliefs and views.
>>1, do you realize that neoconservativism is a school of thought relating primarily to foreign policy, whereas neoliberalism is primarily a school of thought of economics? You can be both a neoconservative and a neoliberal at the same time. Neoliberalism emphasizes deregulation of the economy and establishing equality without the market, whereas neoconservativism stresses active involvement in world affairs especially through military means to secure national interests compounded with a conservative populism.
Your problem is obviously your sources, who are boring, shrill old-guard leftists that irk conservatives everywhere.
Also, look at Chomsky's 'two cases' comparisons of Latin American media response and American media response to a couple of lower-profile atrocities in the 1990s. The people who are spitting in your face are examples of the continuation of that trend of denial of the country's mistakes.
U.S. Stages Elections in Iraq -- Results Pose New Problems and Dangers
Revolution #029, January 8, 2006, posted at http://revcom.us/
Elections took place in Iraq on December 15 literally under the gun.
The polling places were packed with U.S.-trained Iraqi police and soldiers -- who have earned themselves a reputation as corrupt death squads and torturers in many parts of the country. U.S. troops were typically stationed on surrounding roofs or gathered within striking distance. And the streets in many cities were criss-crossed with armed checkpoints.
Immediately, people in the U.S. were told that this election showed that they should all support this bloody and unjust occupation -- however long it took to reach victory. President Bush reached new heights of hype saying that this election was one of the most "amazing achievements in the history of liberty" and a "major milestone" toward U.S. victory over the insurgency. In fact, this election was none of these things -- and attacks on U.S. forces increased sharply in the days after the voting.
>the notorious U.S. agent Ahmed Chalabi was (despite a humiliating defeat in the Dec. 15 election) suddenly elevated to the highly strategic post of Iraqi oil minister two weeks later
This guy is gonna be dead meat the day the US troops move out. But I bet he isn't gonna stay to verify that.
>Already over 100,000 Iraqi people have died since the U.S. launched its 2003 invasion.
Oooh such a strong statement... based on what? Guessing? My guess is 140,000-160,000 civilians.
> the fact is that it is war
False. The U.S. never declared war.
regardless of that, it is still an armed conflict and colateral damage is to be expected in ANY armed conflict
__| _ _|_
___________________________ People of America,
/ ____ ____ \ you have too much spare tme
/ || __ || | __ | \ on your hands.
/ o||/..\|| |/..\| \
| o ||----|| |----| | | /
__| _ _|_
___________________________ People of America,
/ ____ ____ \ you have too much spare time
/ || __ || | __ | \ on your hands.
/ o||/..\|| |/..\| \
| o ||----|| |----| | | /
The US doesn't realize that you can't actually export democracy. It's more something that you wrench from the grasp of your oppressors.
Guess who the oppressor is in Iraq today?
They also ordered iraqis to change the elected prime minister since then, but nobody noticed. :D Iraq won't be independent and sovereign until the so called US "embassy" is destroyed or unmanned by americans and all the rest of their bases are gone. Until then the americans are in charge, no matter what person is doing the puppet dance.
>>9 is a great example of talk that tells like-minded people what they already know while alienating all others. There is no substantial argument in it whatsoever. It is just chanting. That's why the Iraq war debate is so polarized: it isn't a debate, it's a shouting match.
Yet Mr. nine's chant sounds quite reasonable given that the USA, for instance, did wrest its own twisted little form of republicanism from the lardy paw of the British empire.
Anyway, isn't this a common meta-"fallacy"? Sort of a "well congratulations, the bandwagon wasn't sure what to do in your absence" thing?
I've read several articles now about fellow americans losing their jobs for things they say off the job that their bosses disagree with.
Courts have ruled this is ok, and people will spout something along the lines of "free speech does not mean free from responsiblity".
Under that line, one could argue you're free to denounce the government if youre willing to take responsiblity with a bullet in your back. certainly denying one income, and therefore food, shelter, and basic security through termination could be considered easily as drastic.
He who has the gold makes the rules. Wrong or right, thats simply how life is. When you work for someone youre essentially a guest in his home. And he has the right to stipulate what you can and cannot do. Retailers like Target forbid sexual Harrassment, though one could argue it being against free speech.
You speak as if this was some sort of natural law. It is not. It's merely an arbitary legal decision.
No, the law forbids sexual harresment. Here's a non-broken example:
[company] forbids cursing.
This could be argued to be a violation of free speech, but is allowed under the law because it could offend a customer, which could affect buisness. However, what someone does on their own time, as was the example in >>1, has no bearing on someone's job performance, and discriminating based on such factors should be disallowed.
Going on a slight tanget, with regards to FoS in general (not related to the 1st) does the doctrine of "Political correctness" cause more harm to FoS than it does good?
A boss has the right to fire his employees, as long as it is not on the basis of sex, gender, race, religion, etc.
Freedom of speech protects a persons speech from the government, but not from other citizens who also excersize their rights.
In some anime series like GiTS: 2nd GiG, Gasaraki, Patlabor 2, they always show this agenda that the US will take over Japan under the pretense of helping to supress a local conflict. Where did the producers ever get this crazy idea? DO some Japanese people really feel that the US might take over Japan in the future??
wooo gung ho! I'm american and used to have great pride in my nation, but I have come to terms with the fact we are on economic (and with that eventually military) decline, and i'm not upset about it anymore because the majority of my fellow citizens have shown their true colors as gullible morons for the past 6 years.
I'm just biding my time, waiting for the right moment to jump ship before it slips beneath the waves taking the worthless vermin which typpify its citizenry with them.
If America was going to attack Japan, there would be all of the time in the world to make anything we needed to. Not to mention we have a HUGE supply of missles and shit already and they aren't going to suddenly just stop working.
Also, wars are almost always great for the economies of industrialized nations.
i think there are stories like silent operation (where the sub called yamato appears...yamato has a special meaning) because japanese want to have power to intimidate neighbors. they don't want to make any "unfair" treaties because of lack of power. they want to force other nations to make an "unfair" treaties for japan's favor.
this thought is from the radical extreme groups, of course; i really hope that this isn't the case for the most of japanese.
"Weatherman Claims Japanese Mafia Behind Hurricane Katrina
similar thing happened in japan after the great earthquake of kanto in 1923. japanese authorities encouraged false rumors & murdered thousands of innocent koreans.
The Japanese seem to resent the United States as a nation, as well as the influence Americans have had in shaping the Japanese political system. People don't like to see old, traditional ways change, and that's true all across the world. If this is the case, I guess they shouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor, huh?
>>81 is genius at regurgutating clichés he read somewhere on the internet!
in reference to slaves, might i remind you of the practically 100% japanese population in Japan. Where as in AMerica, it isnt so pure.
America taking over Japan ?
I think because some Japanese are affected by Tom clacy and some military novelize
I do not understand why them to shout hysterically
"JAP as threat"
This insistance is completely nonsense.
Even beby can understand it.
America has 12000 nuclear weapons,Stealth bomber and fighters and Nuclear Air craft carriers and Nuclear submarines and 10 times military expense as Japanese(American military expense is half of world total) and General trigger happy
and etc etc etc...
I can,t find any reason why they regard japan as threat to US.
Military invasion is so 2001.....it's out of style and comparing military might is so cold war era, get with the times its all cultural and economics now.
The realism in US phisically taking over Japan is about as real as Democracy in Singapore, for the near furute anyway
Supposidly for "Hygenic Purposes" American Soldiers burned the bodies of two dead taliban fighters, and the act was caught on camera by an Australian Network. Afghanistan's president was outraged at this, for Islam forbids cremation and demands respect for the dead. This is yet another black mark on the US Military.
It is called the Geneva Accords. Cruel and Unusuall Punishment of Detained Prisoners. Also. I believe there is also a part in the accords that forbids the mistreatment of the dead.
I swear I've read that somewhere else before.
Oh, right. Ann Coulter.
Posts like >>3 make me hope the poster is trolling. : (
I think we as a nation should slaughter these people and celebrate to the screams and cries of their women and children.
The Vikings did this and nobody gave THEM any shit.
>>10 That's because the Viking worship Thor, Thor beats jesus any day
Wow, you're a lot cooler than the other assholes on the other pages.
They don't believe in Valhalla or Thor either.
I'm serious, You can't play with these bastards. If they desire Allah and Paradise then it is our duty to send them all there in the most painful and brutal manner possible.
Then we should celebrate on the ashen ruins of their land by feasting and fornicating with our chosen women.
He must be in South Pole!
I think that Bin Laden is a person Bush made up to hide the fact that everything bad ever done in this country was done by Bush, for Bush, or about Bush (or a combination of the three). There's a fly in your soup? It's Bush. Your shoes are missing? Bush stole them. You wake up one day and you're suddenyl in Antarctica? Bush ordered some of his goons to send you thee on Air Force One so you'd stop looking at pictures of his arse.
No, really. All that was done by Bush. If you don't believe me, then look in your bathroom. If the poop in your toilet isn't missing, Bush is currently waiting behind the shower curtain to eat it.
Trolling is fun.
I only read your name and the last line, and from that I will asume you are an idiot.
He's in White house.
its simple, they havent found bin laden cos it keeps the public scared of terrorism. if they were to find him sure things would be better for us but the goverment is not gonna be able to spoon feed all that propaganda its been doing for the last couple of years. I mean why the hell did the US invade iraq???
>>22 <SPOILER> Bush kills Osama!!</SPOILER>
> It is neither the time nor the place to do so.
I find it disgusting that we shield public officials from the potential consequences of their decisions. If you can't handle the result, you shouldn't be making it.
Cindy Sheehan is an asshole.
I'd have liked to thank >>18 for bumping this thread, but it seems he had to get back to his important buisness of getting the fuck out.
She IS an asshole. A big gaping asshole who literally surfs to attention on the rigid corpse of her own son. Christ lady, he already died once in a war you shit on...no since in prolonging it.
Wars happen, people die, who cares? We are animals. We live to fight, fuck, eat and die.
So you can read your Voltaire, and I'll stick to my de Sade.
No one cares.
>literally surfs to attention on the rigid corpse of her own son.
I literally hate it when people misuse words.
21, gb2starbucks hippie.
America is screwed.
America isn't screwed....yet.
It will be once the collectors come knocking.
I have been watching lately about this whole amnesty/criminalizing for Illegal Immagrants. Now, Personally, I agree with the Criminalization. These estimated Twelve Million Illegal Immagrants have broken the laws, and refused to go through the proper channels to become a citizen of America. Yet part of congress wishes to pass a law forgetting the fact that these people broke the law, and allow them to just become legal citizens. The other part of Congress feels that these People have committed a crime, and are criminals for that fact. I fear we are on the verge of a break down for the fact of the torn support. Protests are growing over the wish to Criminalize these, Including several American Schools removing the American Flag from their campus, and raising the Mexican Flag instead. Other schools have Banned students and teachers from displaying any flags. Which has resulted in even more anger.
Try Using a Subject line that Makes Sense instead of Random Words. Also do Not type like This.
I have long been of the opinion that we need to put landmines all along the border of US/Mexico. We also need guard towers to shoot any of these god awful intruders. We also need to leave their carcasses to rot and leather in the sun as a warning to all of these involuntary "amigos" of ours.
The reason we don't do this to Canada is because for the most part they stay in their own goddamned country and at least hold down a regular job there.
If they want to come over legally then they need to do it LEGALLY. You know, fingerprints, citizenship test, background check, and learning some fucking English.
This is not hard, people.
Americans did, >>5
Loose Change 2nd Edition (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change)
WATCH IT and SPREAD THE WORD
I'm >>3, I'm using a public computer now.
>>4 I'm not sure if I totally lost my credibility here. I only state 'my' opinion. your statement imply that my personal comment on "Even if it's not true, I don't agree with many Bush management. He already shown a lot of dictatorship since 9/11. I see him as 'modern hitler' in many ways." is invalid. In my comparison to hitler. I only see him as what I know him (though I don't know him as much as you do, I guess).
I think one person once said that an argument goes to hell the second someone tries to compare it to Hitler or the holocaust... I can't remember who that was.
Fucking godwin in 3 posts
Haha, while amusing...
What do the majority of Americans think about the whole 9/11 thing? I'm Canadian and I can't see why you continue putting up with this shit and haven't impeached Bush! If the government was not directly responsible for the deaths of Americans, it can be concluded that there was SOME form of cover-up in progress.
because we are apathetic
at least I am
i meant 11
No, it's just that you invoked "hitler" to make a point. This destroys your credibility as it proves you can't have a debate without invoking good/evil and emotional responses from people.
Read Godwins Law.